Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

PORT DARLINGTON WPCP EXPANSION PROJECT Ryerson University Design Team: Nancy Afonso Ruston Bedasie Kirill Cheiko Andrew Iammatteo WEAO Student Design Competition.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "PORT DARLINGTON WPCP EXPANSION PROJECT Ryerson University Design Team: Nancy Afonso Ruston Bedasie Kirill Cheiko Andrew Iammatteo WEAO Student Design Competition."— Presentation transcript:

1 PORT DARLINGTON WPCP EXPANSION PROJECT Ryerson University Design Team: Nancy Afonso Ruston Bedasie Kirill Cheiko Andrew Iammatteo WEAO Student Design Competition

2 2 Objectives: –Develop preliminary design and layout for Phase I expansion –Conceptually design the Phase II expansion –Adhere to design philosophy and limit usage of chemicals Port Darlington WPCP Regional Municipality of Durham has identified a need to expand the Port Darlington WPCP in two phases Port Darlington WPCP – services the Bowmanville Urban Area Introduction Achieve innovation based on field proven projects, with environmental sustainability and cost awareness always in mind. (Courtesy of Google Maps)

3 3 Outline Design Basis and Challenges Process Selection and Facility Design: –Headworks –Primary Treatment –Secondary Treatment –Disinfection –Solids Handling –Additional Considerations Process Control Phase I Economic Analysis Recommendations and Closing Remarks DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

4 4 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Design Basis and Challenges

5 5 Plant Loading Hydraulic Loading: ADF (m 3 /d)PDF (m 3 /d) Added Capacity Total Plant Capacity Added Capacity Total Plant Capacity Current Plant-13,638-34,095 Phase I13,63827,27645,00590,010 Phase II13,20140,47743,563133,574 PollutantAnnual Avg. Concentration (mg/L) BOD TSS180 Total Phosphorus7 Ammonia + Ammonium36 TKN54 Pollutant Loading: DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

6 6 D.O = Design Objective C.L = Compliance Limit Existing Estimated Phase I & Phase II Estimated Existing + Phase I D.OC.LD.OC.LD.OC.L BOD 5 (mg/L) TSS (mg/L) Total Phosphorous (mg/L) Total Ammonia as N (mg/L) - Summer 14N/A Total Ammonia as N (mg/L) - Winter 14N/A E. Coli (org./100 mL) Total Residual Chlorine (mg/L) 0.5N/A Effluent Criteria DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

7 7 Design Challenges An alternative method of disinfection Nitrification Technologies selected must integrate into the existing plant Al 2 (SO 4 ) 3 for P removal must be reconsidered Phase I design and layout must take into account space limitations for Phase II DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

8 8 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Process Selection and Facility Design

9 9 PFD – Phase I Preliminary Treatment Primary Treatment Secondary Treatment Disinfection Phase I Sludge Thickening Existing Sludge Stabilization DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

10 10 Plant Layout DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS 10 (Courtesy of Google Maps)

11 11 Phase I Expansion DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS 11

12 12 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Headworks Phase I Expansion

13 13 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Primary Clarifiers Phase I Expansion

14 14 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS BNR Bioreactors Phase I Expansion

15 15 Secondary Clarifiers DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Phase I Expansion

16 16 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS UV Facility Phase I Expansion

17 17 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Fermenter Phase I Expansion

18 18 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Gravity Belt Thickener Phase I Expansion

19 19 Hydraulic Profile DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Available head = 3.0 m L.L.EL m Outfall Pipe L.L.EL m Conduit from Headworks

20 20 Headworks DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Headworks

21 21 Headworks Installation of two 94 kW raw sewage pumps Commissioning of third headworks channel Commissioning of aerated grit tank DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

22 22 Primary Treatment DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Primary Clarifiers

23 23 Four (4) rectangular clarifier installation Total Volume: 1960m 3 –BOD Removal: 30% –TSS Removal: 55% –HRT: ADF Chain & flight scum/sludge collection Primary Treatment DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

24 24 Secondary Treatment DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS BNR Bioreactors

25 25 Process Selection Activated Sludge with incorporated biological nutrient removal (BNR) –Reduced chemical dependency –Reliable effluent quality –Low sludge production Sludge has higher levels of bioavailable nutrients –Reduced aeration requirements –Improved sludge settleability –Environmentally sustainable DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

26 26 Process Selection: WESTBANK PREANOXICANAEROBICANOXICAEROBIC Influent Secondary Effluent NMLR RAS WAS DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS BNR Bioreactor Secondary Clarifier VFAs

27 27 Equipment Design 40% 20%40% DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS = Anaerobic = Anoxic = Aerobic

28 28 Equipment Design Mechanical Mixers Fine Bubble Diffusers DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS = Anaerobic = Anoxic = Aerobic

29 29 Equipment Design 4.8% 8% 7.8% 79.4% Mechanical Mixers Fine Bubble Diffusers Total Bioreactor Volume: 1,782m 3 SRT: 12 days HRT: 12.5 ADF Average MLSS: 3,000 mg/L Required VFA concentration: 15 – 25 mg/L DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS = Anaerobic = Anoxic = Aerobic

30 Secondary Treatment 30 Secondary Clarifiers DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

31 31 Secondary Clarifiers Based on the solids loading rate Gould II type clarifiers Common sludge collector between sets of two clarifiers DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

32 32 Disinfection DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS UV Facility

33 33 Process Selection Provide additional hydraulic capacity and meet new compliance criteria Selection between chlorination/dechlorination and UV disinfection UV disinfection selected: –Effluent toxicity and safety issues with chlorination –Costs of two processes are becoming comparable –UV capable of the same process reliability, performance track record, and full automatic control capability –Minimal space requirements DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

34 34 Design Basis Open – channel, modular design with horizontal, LP-HI lamps Plant Hydraulics need to be considered Design Objective: 100 E.Coli/100 mL at PDF UV Transmittance of 65% Redundancy to achieve disinfection goal with 1 channel out of service DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

35 35 Open – channel, modular design with horizontal, LP-HI lamps Design Objective: 100 E.Coli/100 mL at PDF UV Transmittance of 65% Design Basis DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS (Courtesy of Trojan Technologies Inc.)

36 36 UV Dose of 30 mW. s/cm 2 using LP-HI lamps 3 channels constructed: 1 Duty and 1 Redundant (equipped); 1 for Phase II (channel only) UV Facility Design DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Water Level = 0.881m UV Banks Automatic Level Controller PDC and Hydraulic Manifold 48 lamps/bank Variable output electronic ballasts Automated quartz sleeve cleaning system (Courtesy of Trojan Technologies Inc.)

37 37 Solids Handling DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Fermenter

38 38 Fermenter Bio-P removal requires VFAs as a source of energy Insufficient VFA supply during winter Addition of a static fermenter will accomplish two goals: –Provide a source of additional VFAs –Increase sludge solids concentration DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

39 39 Fermenter Schematic DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Influent Sludge from Primary Clarifiers Effluent Sludge to Digesters VFA Rich Supernatant to Anaerobic Zones VFA (Courtesy of

40 40 Fermenter Design Design Basis: –SRT required: 3-5 days –Sludge loading: 1517 kg/d or 36.8 m 3 /d (PMF) Fermenter Design Summary: –Volume: 157 m 3 (10 m diameter, 2 m tall) –Sludge solids concentration increased from 4% to 6% –Additional VFAs supplied to the BNR process: 11.2 mg/L DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

41 41 Solids Handling DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Gravity Belt Thickener

42 42 Thickening Construction of a new digester incurs large capital investments Thickening can reduce the volume of sludge and allow the use of the existing digesters Gravity Belt Thickener –Good control capabilities –High cake solids concentration –Relatively low capital and operating costs DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

43 43 Gravity Belt Thickener DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS - Sludge- Separated water

44 44 Gravity Belt Thickener Design Basis: –Peak solids loading: 13,784 kg/d –Peak hydraulic loading: 675 m 3 /d –Desired cake solids concentration: 7% GBT Design Summary: –Length-Width-Height: 5.1 m : 1.7m : 1.5 m –Belt width: 1.2 m –Solids capture: ~95% –Polymer Usage: 2-4 kg/tonne of sludge DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

45 45 Gravity Belt Thickener DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS (Courtesy of City of Beloit)

46 46 Additional Considerations Noise & odour control Septage receiving station Backup generator Phase II Conceptual Design DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Courtesy of Envirocan Phase II Conceptual Design Phase II Liquid Facility

47 47 Phase II Conceptual Design Phase II Solids Facility DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

48 48 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Process Control

49 49 Highlights of Process Control Plant to be operated with minimum supervision required Process Control will rely on automation and plant operators 49 Existing SCADA system is to be upgraded to include control in addition to monitoring DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS (Courtesy of Port Darlington WPCP)

50 50 MOE Requirements Compliance Sampling required by the MOE (To be done by the operators) Raw Sewage Influent BOD 5 TSS NH 3 and NH 4 TP Final Effluent BOD 5 TSS NH 3 and NH 4 TP E. Coli DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

51 51 Process Control Performance monitoring Sampling (To be done by the operators) 1 Raw Sewage Influent Headworks Effluent Primary Clarifier Secondary Clarifier UV Influent Final Effluent pH Temperature BOD 5 TSS TP NH 3 and NH 4 BOD 5 TSS TP NH 3 and NH 4 SVI MLSS NO 2 - and NO 3 - TP E. Coli pH Temperature DO NO 2 - and NO DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

52 52 Raw Sewage Influent Headworks Primary Clarifier BNR Reactors Secondary Clarifier UV Influent Final Effluent Flow- Rate Air flow- rate to the Grit Chamber Flow- rate Primary Sludge pumping Flow-rate Temp. MLSS DO Sludge Age Recycle Rate Ortho- Phosphorus WAS rate RAS rate Alum addition (Polishing) UV Transmittance UV Intensity Level Flow-rate UV Dose Flow- rate Automatic Monitoring and Control (SCADA) Process Control DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

53 53 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Phase I Economic Analysis

54 54 Capital Investment Trade form with 16 Market Price Divisions Detailed analysis for major equipment and concrete costs Mark-ups, allowances and contingencies based on industry recommendations (Hussein, 2010) Phase I estimation: $36 M Accuracy within +50/-30 % for this conceptual level of design DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

55 55 Capital Investment Total Project Cost = $36 M Basic Facility Cost Engineering Services Allowances and Contingencies General Contractors Overhead & Profit DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

56 56 Capital Investment Basic Facility Cost Engineering Services Allowances and Contingencies General Contractors Overhead & Profit Mechanical Electrical Conceptual Design Contingency Allowance Retrofit/Upgrade Allowance Concrete Major Equipment Other DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Total Project Cost = $36 M

57 57 O&M Costs Total Annual O&M Costs = $927K Maintenance LabourElectrical Chemical DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS 34% 17% 31% 18%

58 58 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Recommendations and Closing Remarks

59 59 D.O = Design Objective C.L = Compliance Limit Existing Estimated Phase I & Phase II Estimated Existing + Phase I D.OC.LD.OC.LD.OC.L BOD 5 (mg/L) TSS (mg/L) Total Phosphorous (mg/L) Total Ammonia as N (mg/L) - Summer 14N/A Total Ammonia as N (mg/L) - Winter 14N/A E. Coli (org./100 mL) Total Residual Chlorine (mg/L) 0.5N/A00.2 Recommendations Implement dechlorination in existing facility Retrofit of existing plant to incorporate BNR Increase hydraulic capacity of Headworks Biogas capture and reuse –OPA Feed-in Tariff program (14.7¢/kWh generated) –Potential O&M Savings: $382 K /yr DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

60 60 Closing Remarks Phase I uses AS process with incorporated BNR and UV Effluent will meet more stringent compliance levels Economically feasible –Total Phase I Expansion Cost: $36 M –Annual Phase I Operating Cost: $927 K Environmentally Sustainable DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

61 61 Acknowledgements Dr. Manual Alvarez – Cuenca, Faculty Supervisor Professor of Chemical Engineering – Ryerson University Gisselly Anania, Consultant Advisor Associate Project Manager – CH2M Hill, Water Business Group Jeremy Kraemer Associate Engineer – CH2M Hill, Water Business Group Abu Hussein Regional Estimator – CH2M Hill, Canada Region WEAO Student Design Competition Sub - Committee Vendors: Rob Anderson H2Flow Equipment Inc. Edward M. Pikovnik ENV Treatment Systems Inc. Allen Vivian, Geoff Coate Pro Aqua Inc. Frank Ferrie ITT Water & Wastewater Dale Jackson ACG Technology Ltd. Darrin Hopper H2Flow Tanks & Systems Inc. Michel Bruneau John Meunier Inc. DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

62 62 Questions

63 63 Supporting Documentation

64 64 BNR Bioreactors

65 65 Biological Nutrient Removal 65 Anaerobic Zone PAO VFAs PHB P P Release Energy

66 66 Biological Nutrient Removal 66 Anoxic and Aerobic Zones PAO PHB P Energy O 2 or NO 3 CO 2 + H 2 O Cell growth

67 67 Aerobic Zone Assumptions 20% of the influent TSS are considered inert 40% of the remaining TSS are non-biodegradable 10% of the influent TKN is incorporated into the heterotrophic biomass Heterotrophic organisms do not differentiate between forms of nitrogen in the wastewater Autotrophic organisms do not assimilate an appreciable amount of nitrogen Average sewage temperature of 15°C (minimum: 10°C; maximum 20°C)

68 68 ParameterSymbol15ºC10ºC20ºC Heterotrophic organisms True Yield (kg VSS/kg BOD 5 ) Y htrue 0.6does not vary with temperature Observed Yield (kg VSS/kg BOD 5 ) Y h-obs Decay Coefficient (d -1 ) bhbh Autotrophic organisms True Yield (kg VSS/kg BOD 5 ) Y atrue 0.15does not vary with temperature Observed Yield (kg VSS/kg BOD 5 ) Y h-obs Decay Coefficient (d -1 ) baba Half-velocity constant for N (mg/NH 3 -N/L) K sn 1does not vary with temperature Half-velocity constant for O (mg DO/L) KoKo 0.5does not vary with temperature Max. growth rate (d -1 ) µ max Sizing Aerobic Zone

69 69

70 Anoxic Zone Anaerobic Zone Sizing Zones ParameterSymbolUnitComing from Aeration tank Nitrate in influentTKN o mg/L53.6 Nitrate in effluentNeNe mg/L10 Nitrogen in cell tissueP X,bio mg/L

71 71 Other Design

72 72 Primary Clarifier Specifications ParameterPDFADF Total Volume1960 m 3 Number of clarifiers4 Volume per clarifier490 m 3 Dimensions (Length : Width : Depth)25.5 m : 6.3 m : 3.05 m L:W4 L:D8.36 Weir Length30 m/clarifier Hydraulic Retention Time1.05 h3.45 h Overflow Rate70 m 3 /m 2 *d21.2 m 3 /m 2 *d TSS Removal (55%* Removal) kg/d kg/d BOD 5 Removal (30%* Removal) kg/d kg/d

73 73 Primary Clarifier Profile 73

74 74 FactorValue UV Dose30,000 mWs / m 2 Channel Dimensions (Length : Width : Depth) 10 m : 0.61 m : m Number of Channels (equipped)2 (1 Duty, 1 Redundant) Number of Banks/Channel2 # of Modules/Bank6 # of Lamps/Module8 Total # of Lamps/channel96 Power Requirement/Channel Connected Load = 24 kW Average power draw (avg. flow) = 7.2 kW Hydraulic Design0.881 m of head loss Level controllerAutomatic Level Controller Guaranteed lamp life12,000 hours Control of UV dose deliveryYes, automatic dose pacing Cleaning MechanismAutomatic mechanical/chemical cleaning UV Facility Design

75 75 Sludge Stream Evaluation 75 Stream 5 Properties Mass Flow-rate: kg/d Solids Concentration: 2% Volume Flow-rate: 243 m 3 Stream 8 Properties Mass Flow-rate: 1476 kg/d Solids Concentration: 6% Volume Flow-rate: 24.6 m 3 Stream 9 Properties Mass Flow-rate: 6322 kg/d Solids Concentration: 6.7% Volume Flow-rate: 95 m 3 Desired Stream 6 Properties Mass Flow-rate: kg/d Solids Concentration: 7% Volume Flow-rate: 70.4 m 3 Thickening

76 76 Septage receiving station 76

77 77 Hydraulic Profile Equations Manning equation of head loss through open channels 77 Minor head losses through pipes

78 78 Economics

79 79 Inclusions, Assumptions and Allowances Equipment estimates are based on vender quotations or catalogue costs Major Equipment Installation Costs: 30% of delivered major equipment cost Major Equipment Costs: 15% allowance for equipment not included (eg: RAS, WAS, and primary sludge pipe, UV grates, etc.) Allowances for the 16 Market Price Divisions: see Table D1.1 (Hussein, 2010) Retrofit Allowance for building renovations and facilities that require significant tie-ins to existing facilities: 5% (Hussein, 2010) Contractors Markup (Overhead and Profit): 15% (Hussein, 2010)

80 80 Inclusions, Assumptions and Allowances Contingencies (Hussein, 2010): –Conceptual Design Contingency Allowance: 20% (Hussein, 2010) –Construction Contingency: 5% –Construction Escalation and Market Contingency: 3% each of total estimated Engineering Services for Design and Construction Administration: 12% of total facility construction costs (Hussein, 2010) Concrete: –$ 1100 / m 3 (frame, concrete, rebar) (Hussein, 2010) –Allowances (Anania, 2010): 7% for common channels 20% for galleries and tunnels

81 81 Exclusions GST Timeline escalation contingency Non-competitive market conditions (i.e. shortage of materials, shortage of skilled labour) Additional costs if construction is accelerated

82 82 Total Project Cost Port Darlington WPCP Phase I Expansion - CAPITAL COST Sub-Total Basic Facility Costs$20.09 M Retrofit & phasing, demolition & upgrades $1.01 M General Contractor's Overhead & Profit $3.17 M Conceptual Design Contingency Allowance $4.85 M Construction Contingency (Change Orders) $1.21 M Construction Escalation $0.91 M Market Contingency $0.91 M Engineering Services for Design and Construction Administration $3.86 M Total Estimated Project Cost - Excluding GST $36 M

83 83 Annual O&M Port Darlington WPCP Phase I Expansion - ANNUAL O&M COST ItemUnits Unit Cost Daily Quantities Yearly Quantities Yearly Cost 1. Electrical Total - Electrical Costs(see Electricity Cost Table)$153, Chemical - aluminum sulphatekg$ ,404$293,300 - polymerkg$612.24,453$26,700 Total - Chemical Costs$320, Maintenance Total Major Equipment Cost(see Major Equipment Table)$5,746,387 % of Major Equipment Cost5% Total - Maintenance Costs$287, Labour Full Time Operators2 $40/hr Total yearly hours (8 hrs/day, 5 days/week) 4160 Total - Labour Costs$166,400 Total Annual Operating Cost:$927,300

84 84 DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS Process Control

85 85 Operators Sampling Duties Parameter to measure Raw Influent Head works Primary Clarifier BNR Reactors Secondary Clarifier UV Facility Final Effluent Frequency BOD DailyMonthly ---Daily TSS DailyMonthly ---Daily SVI ----Daily-- pH Daily----- Total Phosphorus Daily----- RAS blanket depth ----Daily-- Primary Sludge blanket depth --Daily---- Ammonia Daily----- Nitrate Daily Dissolved Oxygen Weekly E. Coli ----Weekly-

86 86 Process Control - Solids Performance monitoring Sampling – Solids Handling (To be done by the operators) 1 FermenterGBTPrimary Digester Secondary Digester 1234 & 5 % Solids pH% Solids VFAVSSTP pH VSS DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

87 87 Process Control - Solids Automatic Monitoring and Control – Solids Handling (SCADA) 1 FermenterGBTPrimary Digester Secondary Digester 1234 & 5 Sludge WastingFlow-RateLevel Polymer DosingFlow-rate Temperature Alum Dosing DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS

88 88 Phase II Considerations

89 89 Phase II Considerations New headworks facility Four additional liquid trains (identical to Phase I) Installation of UV equipment in 3 rd chamber Fermenter Gravity Belt Thickener Primary High Rate Anaerobic Digester

90 90 Implementation and Construction Schedule

91 91 Equipment Design % 8% 7.8% 79.4% Mechanical Mixers Fine Bubble Diffusers Total Bioreactor Volume: 7,127 m 3 SRT: 12 days HRT: 12.5 ADF Average MLSS: 3,000 mg/L Required VFA concentration: 15 – 25 mg/L DESIGN BASIS AND CHALLENGES PROCESS SELECTION AND FACILITY DESIGN PROCESS CONTROL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSING REMARKS = Anaerobic = Anoxic = Aerobic


Download ppt "PORT DARLINGTON WPCP EXPANSION PROJECT Ryerson University Design Team: Nancy Afonso Ruston Bedasie Kirill Cheiko Andrew Iammatteo WEAO Student Design Competition."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google